"Giorgione is regarded as a unique figure in the history of art: almost no other Western painter has left so few secure works and enjoyed such fame..." Sylvia Ferino-Pagden.

My website, MyGiorgione, now includes my interpretations of Giorgione's "Tempest" as "The Rest on the Flight into Egypt"; his "Three Ages of Man" as "The Encounter of Jesus with the Rich Young Man"; Titian's, "Sacred and Profane Love" as "The Conversion of Mary Magdalen"; and Titian's "Pastoral Concert" as his "Homage to Giorgione".

Thursday, November 27, 2014

In my
interpretation of Giorgione’s “Tempest” as “The Rest on the Flight into Egypt” I
did not include a discussion of the "pentimenti"or “changes of mind”
in the painting. I believed that the painting should be evaluated on what
Giorgione finally decided he wanted the viewer to see.

I add a discussion here because much has
been written about the “pentimenti” and their significance. While not necessary
in supporting an interpretation of the painting as "The Rest on the Flight
into Egypt," the "pentimenti" do not contradict it, especially
the heretofore inexplicable little man on the bridge. See the following essay
(slightly revised) that originally appeared at Giorgione et al…. in 2010 after
I had presented my paper at the annual meeting of the Renaissance Society of
America held that year in Venice on the 500th anniversary of Giorgione’s death in 1510.

In "Giorgione, Myth and
Enigma," the catalog for the ground breaking 2004 Giorgione exhibition,
the essay on the "Tempesta" by Giovanna Nepi-Scire included a
discussion of “pentimenti” or “changes of mind” revealed by the scientific
exploration of what lies beneath the surface of the famous painting.*

X-ray and radiographic technology
did shed some light on the techniques of the painter and the materials he used
but the results were inconclusive when it came to the meaning and subject of
the painting. The "pentimenti" did not reveal much of Giorgione's
original intention. Or did they?

One of the discarded figures in
the underpainting had already received much attention from scholars.
Originally, the canvas included a nude woman dipping her legs in a stream at
the lower left hand corner. The catalog article indicated that some scholars
believe that this figure provides an important clue even though the
radiographic image is so indistinct that it is impossible to say whether the
figure was even part of the original painting, or whether it was even painted
by Giorgione.

For some, however, the “bathing
woman” indicates that Giorgione originally intended the painting to contain two
women. This contention would necessarily send the hunt for a “subject” into an
entirely different direction.

However, the size of this bathing
figure in relation to the nursing woman led the author of the catalog entry to
reject the theory that Giorgione had originally intended to place two women in
the painting.

In addition, the proportions appear slightly larger than those
of the man and the nursing woman in the final version. If this figure really
was part of the initial version, then there must have been a male figure on the
right… [p. 192]

Interestingly, a “bathing
Madonna” would not be out of place in a depiction of the “Rest on the Flight
into Egypt.” One of the apocryphal legends refers to a fountain near the
Egyptian village of Matarea that sprang up to nourish the Madonna and her
child. In his “Madonna della Scodella,” Correggio painted a version of the Rest
on the Flight into Egypt with Mary dipping a bowl into a stream.

Correggio: Madonna della Scodella

But, in my opinion, there is a
much more telling pentimento. The Catalog indicated that the radiographic
technology revealed,

the presence of a figure
walking across the bridge in a long robe and carrying over his right shoulder a
stick with a suspended load. (p. 192)

According to the Catalog this
discovery contributed “nothing to the deciphering of the painting,” and there
has been very little discussion of the little man since. I do not have an image
of the man, but during my brief stay in Venice, I visited the Accademia and one of the authors of the Catalog
article pointed out to me where the little man stood on the bridge.

A walking man with a stick
bearing a sack over his shoulder is easily recognizable as a pilgrim. St.
Joseph’s sack is commonplace in depictions of the Flight into Egypt. Often in
depicting the “Rest on the Flight into Egypt,” artists used a narrative format,
which included the actual journey in the background and the resting figures in
the foreground.

Gerard David: Rest on the Flight

In Gerard David’s version of the
“Rest on the Flight into Egypt” in New York’s Metropolitan Museum, the Madonna
sits in the foreground nursing her Son while in the background she rides atop
the Ass with Joseph trailing behind on foot carrying over his shoulder a stick
with a suspended load.

This piece of evidence fits no
other interpretation of the "Tempest." Why would a pilgrim be in a
mythological or classical setting? It is only explicable in reference to the
“Flight into Egypt.” Because the man is on the bridge, he must have been in the
original painting but then Giorgione changed his mind. I can only guess that he
realized he didn’t need it or that it would have been cumbersome to also
include a miniature animal and rider.

To argue that Giorgione depicted
a traditional subject in the Tempesta should in no way detract from his
greatness. Another article in the Catalog [“Giorgione’s Materials and Painting
Technique: Scientific Investigation of Three Paintings,”] indicated that in
technique Giorgione was more traditional than commonly believed.

One could say that the artistic
revolution caused by Giorgione does not necessarily translate into strictly
technological innovation….Instead, there is clear evidence of an ability to
utilize the extensive materials available in Venice and of a sound knowledge of
the painting techniques accumulated by Venetian workshops during the 15th
century….This demonstrates how the greatness of an artist is in no way bound by
‘vile matter.’ [p. 260]

Scientific analysis has its value but there are two problems
with attempts to get below the surface of any painting. First, what scholar
would be happy with criticism of his or her work based on a discarded first
draft of an essay? Wouldn't any of us want analysis and criticism to based
solely on the finished product? Why should it be any different for a
universally acknowledged master like Giorgione? Second, there is the danger
that in looking beneath the surface we might divert our attention from the
actual finished product and fail to see what the painter finally wanted the
viewer to see.

Sunday, November 16, 2014

In his “Lives of the Artists” Giorgio
Vasari placed his brief biography of Giorgione right after Leonardo da Vinci’s
and ranked the young Venetian master, who died tragically in 1510 at about the
age of 34, with the great Florentine master. Even though Vasari
visited Venice on at least two occasions, it is hard to determine what
Giorgione works he saw with his own two eyes.But there can be no doubt that he saw Giorgione’s frescoes
on the exterior walls of the Fondaco dei Tedeschi, the center of the German
merchant community situated on the Grand Canal near the Rialto bridge.

The Fondaco dei Tedeschi had
burned to the ground in 1504, and the Venetian government hastened to rebuild
the structure so important to its trade with the North. The new building was finished
by 1507, and the young Giorgione was given the commission to decorate the
exterior walls. The commission was a sign of Giorgione’s elevated artistic
status, and its completion only added to his fame. The Venetian weather
eventually did havoc on the Fondaco frescoes but the spectacular figures and
colors were still evident when Vasari saw them a little more than three decades
after Giorgione’s death.

Although extremely impressed,
Vasari confessed that he could not understand the subject or the meaning of
much of the work. He concluded that in the Fondaco frescoes, Giorgione

thought only of demonstrating his techniques
as a painter by representing various figures according to his own fancy.
Indeed, there are no scenes to be found there with any order or representing
the deeds of any distinguished person, of either the ancient or the modern
world. And I for my part have never been able to understand his figures nor,
for all my asking, have I ever found anyone who does. In these frescoes one sees,
in various attitudes, a man in one place, a woman standing in another, one
figure accompanied by the head of a lion, another by an angel in the guise of a
cupid; and heaven knows what it all means. *[274-5]

However, Vasari did identify one
figure as the biblical heroine Judith. **

Over the door which leads to the storerooms
for the wares, a seated figure of a woman is depicted. She has the head of a
dead giant at her feet, as is the custom in representations of Judith; and this
head she is raising with a sword, while speaking, at the same time, to a figure
in the German habit, who is standing, still further beneath her. What or whom
this figure may be intended to represent, I have never been able to determine,
unless, indeed, it be meant for a figure of Germany. [275]

Fortunately, we have a print copy
of the Judith fresco from a seventeenth century engraving. It shows Judith
dressed in the finery described in the biblical account, with her bare leg
resting on the head of Holophernes. *** At the bottom left is a half-length
figure of an armored warrior who looks up at Judith. Given that the Fondaco was
the German center, I suppose it was natural for Vasari to claim that the man in
the scene represented Germany. Interestingly, like many art historians since
his time, when Vasari has difficulty identifying a figure he gives it an
allegorical interpretation.

I believe that the identity of
the man in the Judith fresco can be discovered by taking a closer look at the
Book of Judith. Whether in Vasari’s time or ours, churchgoers tend to be aware
only of the highlights of biblical stories. But even a quick reading of the
relatively short Book of Judith shows that a foreign warrior played a key role
in the narrative. It is Achior, the leader of a contingent of Ammonite mercenaries
serving in the army of Holophernes.

At the outset of the story
Holophernes had asked his various lieutenants for information about the
Israelites who dared to oppose his army from their mountain fortress of
Bethulia. Achior came forward and recounted the history of the Israelites and
the many times that their God had delivered them from adversity. He concluded
that unless the Israelites had offended their God, it would do no good to
attack them. Holophernes was shocked by this impudent prophecy, and had Achior
left bound hand and foot near the Israelite walls to fulfill a prophecy of his
own.

As for you, Achior, you Ammonite mercenary, who in a
rash moment said these words, you shall not see my face again until the day
when I have taken my revenge on this brood of fugitives from Egypt….you will
not die, until you share their ruin. ****

The Israelites took Achior into
their stronghold and treated him well after they heard his account of what had
transpired with Holophernes.

The rest of the story was well
known during the Renaissance. Although the book of Judith came to be rejected
by Protestant scholars, it was very popular in the early Christian church, and
its popularity continued right into the Baroque era in Catholic circles. During
the Renaissance Judith was often paired with David for both were examples of God
using the weak to triumph over the strong. Judith also came to be seen as a
prototype of Mary.

However, the little known Achior
made one more appearance at the end of the narrative. After Judith brought the
head of Holophernes to the Israelite camp, she asked that Achior view the enemy
general’s head in a kind of ironic twist to Holophernes’ own prophecy.

“call
me Achior the Ammonite for him to see the man who thought so meanly of the
House of Israel and recognize this as the man who sent him to us as a man
already doomed to die.”…No sooner had he arrived and seen the head of
Holophernes held by a member of the people’s assembly than he fell down on his
face in a faint. They lifted him up. He then threw himself at the feet of
Judith, and prostrate before her exclaimed:

May
you be blessed in all the temples of JudahAnd
in every nation;At
the sound of your nameMen
will be seized with dread….

Subsequently, Achior professed his
belief in the God of the Israelites, was circumcised and converted.

Vasari was mistaken in his
identification of the warrior on the Judith fresco but there still could be a
bit of allegory involved in its placement on the Fondaco dei Tedeschi.I suspect that the placement of this
scene on the Fondaco wall was a sign of the relationship between Venice and the
German community in Venice. It is not hard to imagine that Venice was
represented there by Judith, and the German community by the foreign Warrior
looking up at her.

###

*Giorgio
Vasari, Lives of the Artists, Volume
I, a selection translated by George Bull, Penguin Books, 1968. All selections
from Vasari are from these editions. Page numbers are in brackets.

**Vasari
attributed this fresco to Giorgione but its location on the Merceria side of
the Fondaco would indicate that it was done by Titian. However, I do believe
that Giorgione was responsible for the whole iconographic scheme including the
cartoons of all the work. In any case, this essay is about Vasari's eyewitness view and interpretation.

***
Judith’s bare leg has been discussed in an earlier post on this site.